Messages - Nagaraj

These guidelines are very important for each sadhaka, who is sincerely seeking liberation. Some quick references, that i came about with. Friends kindly suggest any points which may be of importance that can be included in this list.

Absolutely! The problem is that almost everyone is not looking for the truth but to justify his/her theology and belief.

Dear i,

no need to worry about everyone , Bhagavan always has said, attend to your self, the purpose for which each one has come. We are not here to correct anybody, or, uplift anybody, we are here just, absolutely for ourselves. We are not saviors of Christ teachings, or saviors of Vedas or any other scriptures. If we are blessed with the true purport of the scriptures, bible, vedas, then it is our good fortune, only for us to strengthen our sadhana further.

What matters is not where everyone is looking for truth, not whether most followers are looking for God, but, what matters is our own selves. Because, if we look outside, we are not looking within.

Outside, hundreds of things may go on, the true wisdom is only to look within, no matter what goes on externally.

Once Bhagavan saw somebody cutting a twig in the night for use the next morning as a toothbrush. “Can’t you let the tree sleep in peace?” he asked. “Surely you can have your twig in the daytime. Why not have a little sense and compassion? A tree does not howl nor can it bite or run away: it does not mean you can do anything to it?”

The Bhagavan I Knew by Voruganti KrishnayyaAs told to G. Vankatachalam. Translated from Telugu by Surya PrasadRamana Smrti Souvenir

in the life of Sri Sundaresa Iyer, when he was overwhelmed at his samsara life and was having enough of it, was wondering when he wold get the good fortune of staying with Bhagavan always, which he was desperately desiring, and when he spoke about it to Bhagavan, He replied - "Aattam kalayattum, Piragu" meaning - "let the game get over, then"

what was Sri Ramakrsihanar's views on sanyasam. i have read few articles about how even householders too can attain god, but what were his teachings about sanyasam. what were his instructions to the ones who are un married, and have strong intense desire to only attain God. It would be great if you could shed some light on Ramakrishan Order as well. How is the life of a monk, their regulations, etc...

Bhagavan has said, what is really required is internal sanyasam. When Kunju Swami had taken sanyasam from somebody, with some ananada name, Bhagavan made fun of him and said, for him, he is Kunju only!

Why I am asking this is because, times havee changed very significantly, since both great Masters. Today, the external world is much more different from what could even have been expected some 60 years back, when even Bhagavan was there. So there arises a need to know the way out, for the ones who do not want to get married.

when you said - "I woke up AS IS with no damage" Who are you refering to? Who woke up from sleep?

In essence, "I" was persisted inside Prana when I slept. Only Prana existed. No I. When Prana projected back "I", "I" came up and said Prana should have existed in sleep as it projected me back itact. Not logical?

I am sorry - I am trying to walk the path and prove Shunya vada wrong which Acharya Swamigal did so well I have heard. Again, I think I cannot escape the question "Who controlled Prana" and that which controlled Prana must be there when everything else is not there. And must exist when Prana disappears. But I cannot reach it with Prana. Perhaps, that is why great souls go through "death experience" like Bhagawan. Else, mere sleep experience would have led them there

Now, you have observed that "I" persisted inside Prana. Now, please discern whether there are 2 here, one Prana and other "I" can both exist? please contemplate, what you mean when you said - " "I" was persisted inside Prana when I slept."

Contemplate on these two, what are you really referring to, when you say 'Prana' and what are you referring to when you say 'I'

Some facts. In advanced yogic practices, especially, those adept with Hatha Yoga, and, due to advanced Pranayama practices, when they meditate, after a while, they reach breathlessness and continue to meditate, and later, they are able to breath normally.

Another simple fact for discernment, In all cardiac surgeries, when the doctors operate the body, the heart is made to stop pumping blood, does not life energy still remain?

Yet, you are moving in the right direction, even though, all the discernment about Prana, etc... may not yet be giving clarity, when you asked yourself this beautiful question -

"I cannot escape the question "Who controlled Prana" and that which controlled Prana must be there when everything else is not there. And must exist when Prana disappears. But I cannot reach it with Prana."

i ask, why do you want to reach that. That only Art Thou. There is no reaching that, for we are being that. Like in my previous post, the desire to reach that is not possible, because, you are that. You very self, which is feeling incomplete is very much That. you which feels ego 'I' itself is 'That' Just we need to seek to clarify to erase the ego. All these are happening in the presence of the Self.

This is subtle and at the same time, silly as well, literally, like that of a person who is searching for his spectacles wearing it on his nose. He can never find his spectacles unless he realizes that he is already wearing it, and there is no finding it, and it is impossible to find it. And, at the same, when he realises that he is already wearing it, we really can't sat that he found it, for it was already there, and at the same time, we cant even say, there is no finding as well.

Wanting to reach the Self, see the Self, is like wanting the eye to look at itself, can the eye, at any time, be able to look its own pupil?

When the seeker, fervently desires to see Himself no more, then the seeker reposes within as Himself. - Jnaneshwar

This itself is Surrender or Sharanagathi. And this happens when true Jnana results.

How are you able to say this? You are able to claim very convincingly that Prana existed. It is true, it existed.

And, you also said - "I never watched it through." but still, you are able to say, Prana existed.

When you said, you never watched it, you meant to have not watched it through your 5 senses, your never saw it, felt it, smelled it, heard it, tasted it, yet you know its existence!

Let us keep aside the plays of what Prana does. The Prana may do hundreds of things.

But beyond this, you were still able to know it, that prana existed. You were able to see it, without actually seeing it, you were able to hear it, without actually hearing it, you were able to touch it, without actually touching it, you were able taste it, without actually tasting it.

It is this 'thing' that you refer to when you made the following observations:

"Who maintained Prana"?"Eshwara maintained it"

You want to logically prove the existence of "I" without Prana. How is this possible, when the entity that is trying to prove ios itself the proving entity.

How can the Sun illuminate itself? How can the Knife cut itself? How can the tongue taste itself? How can the water drink itself?

I keep getting myself into this trap - is it not Prana which is persistent when awake, dreaming or in deep sleep. Is it not prana which is "persisting" me in deep sleep and giving me continuity when I wake up. The same I which slept, came back with continuity because Prana was there all through? Is it not? When Prana goes the "I" goes and never comes back (unlike in sleep) and has no continuity. THis is the mental trap I am in.

I know I am wrong obvioulsy because my most beloved Guru says it is not - but I am unable convince myself ? Should I simply trust Guru and proceed that it is NOT Prana or is there any logical explanation to my dilemma?

Dear i,

How were you able to discern thus? You must be separate from the prana to have watched it all through, during your sleep, waking, dream states, don't you

You are that, in whose presence all happens, or, how else, are you able to say, and, present your observations for reasoning?